I have the perfect song to test this with. I hope I get my invite sooner rather than later.

You'll probably have to wait a little while to test that song. The first part of the beta uses a logging version which is significantly slower than the real thing to help us find bugs in the rewrite we did, also letting you turn the improvements on/off. Then later on in the beta there'll be a non-logging version where you can test performance without any limitations.

So how and why does it also improve the overall, non-VST performance? I remember this wasn't an assumption or even expected (although I'm super happy about it, because I disabled VSTs in Reason altogether).

So how and why does it also improve the overall, non-VST performance? I remember this wasn't an assumption or even expected (although I'm super happy about it, because I disabled VSTs in Reason altogether).

Does it matter how and why? Feels like a non-issue

But, long story short: we've done some restructuring and fixes when we adapted Reason to the new audio rendering.

It doesn't matter how and why as long as everything works in bug-free. I'm drinking few beers now to celebrate your efforts to bring us a better version of Reason. Some people cry even when they should not.

So how and why does it also improve the overall, non-VST performance? I remember this wasn't an assumption or even expected (although I'm super happy about it, because I disabled VSTs in Reason altogether).

Does it matter how and why? Feels like a non-issue

But, long story short: we've done some restructuring and fixes when we adapted Reason to the new audio rendering.

I'm just (positively) surprised and curious. You seem to be overly sensitive towards anything I post. I'm not making any issue of it, but you seem to be keen on doing it...

But, long story short: we've done some restructuring and fixes when we adapted Reason to the new audio rendering.

I'm just (positively) surprised and curious. You seem to be overly sensitive towards anything I post. I'm not making any issue of it, but you seem to be keen on doing it...

No no, you misunderstand me! I just believe that often a discussion (not by you specifically!) ends up being about technical details that don't make a difference for what we're here for: making music. That's something I'm generally frustrated by. The gear industry has been grooming people to care about 8x oversampling, 192kHz sample rate, perfect sample rate conversion and so on without understanding it. In the end that's not what makes good music and often it's something that people can't even hear or need to care about.

If it comes off as some kind of ill-will toward you, I apologize. It's a knee-jerk reaction because I simply don't like the discussion becoming about the details instead of the outcome, I guess.

As I hope you know, I've got nothing against constructive criticism. Constructive criticism is the whole reason we have Reason 9.5, Reason 10, Reason 10.2 and now Reason 10.3!

PSA: for those who are testing, it would be helpful to read Mattias' blog post, and in particular, pay attention to the part where he says:

What we're defining as "bad performance" is when you start hearing audible artifacts, like clicking and popping, or experience issues that keep you from making music. In other words, we're not looking at the CPU meter in the OS, but rather we're testing where you'd have issues in a real-life music making scenario.

This is also a logging version, so your performance with this is going to be far worse while you work through finding bugs. Don't use this for productions or projects that are valuable. A good approach is to create copies of the projects you want to test and keep them in a separate beta test folder.

so if the logging slows things down, how are performance improvements made apparent?

not trying to get in the weeds; just genuinely curious (been wondering about it for weeks, and I’d assumed the logging thing would be turned off or handled differently, somehow). is the logging-related slowness clearly different than VST performance? (so as a user, I’d be able to see something and say, ‘oh, that’s just because of logging’.)

or is that just covered in the beta testing instructions?

I’ve only been involved in one Reason beta, and opted to leave that for others because of the logging, so forgive my ignorance...

so if the logging slows things down, how are performance improvements made apparent?

not trying to get in the weeds; just genuinely curious (been wondering about it for weeks, and I’d assumed the logging thing would be turned off or handled differently, somehow). is the logging-related slowness clearly different than VST performance? (so as a user, I’d be able to see something and say, ‘oh, that’s just because of logging’.)

or is that just covered in the beta testing instructions?

I’ve only been involved in one Reason beta, and opted to leave that for others because of the logging, so forgive my ignorance...

It'll be covered in the instructions, but in terms of comparing: there's a switch in the preferences to exclude Reason 10.3's improvements and go back to the old audio rendering. That way you can see differences. However, the MAIN point in testing the logging version is that we're looking for things we might've broken when improving performance. Logging will help us catch asserts and bugs when using the program normally.

After a while in the beta, we'll also release non-logging versions for pure performance testing.